The credits to INLAND EMPIRE are a source of frustration when it comes to identifying Majch's characters.

Lynch chose to give only one credited character to each main actor (with the exceptions of Dern and Theroux), even though they (including Dern) clearly play anywhere between two and four characters each.

For instance, why isn't Majch at least credited as The Phantom/Crimp? For the same reason that Lucas is credited as playing Piotrek Krol instead of Piotrek Krol/Smithy - IE is a veritable spectacle of obfuscation.

My wife points out, as someone has here, that when, in the reading on the sound stage, Nikki reads the line 'Go look in the next room', this is when Freddie interrupts and Devon does what, in the dialog, Billy was bade and goes to look in the next room. Cute.The love scene that this 'earlier scene' preceeded never eventuates in Smithy's House in OHIBT, but , of course, does between Devon and Nikki in the set of Smithy's house. Nice.Also, when Devon leaves to do this checking out the 2nd time around, after Sue has followed the axxonN writing into the back of the set, Sue looks at the group sitting there and sees Kingsley, Freddie and Nikki, then looks again and Nikki has disappeared. Sweet.**Sue and Doris both hit the skids pretty quickly and end up in he same place.Perhaps Sue's slide is believably as shown but Doris, having caught hubby off base, is more likely to have ended up with his house and assets than she is to be running around Hollywood's seamy streets at night. Perhaps, in the context of OHIBT, both had merely fantasized both Billy's MacMansion and Smithy's tidy little bungalow, and in fact are street people who have an animosity exacerbated by their proximity and mutual insanity.Their triangle with Billy might just be a glamorizaion of their dealings with men ( generic).The hypnosis scenes ( of Doris when Sue intrudes and Sue, when she enters the strip club) may be projecting these Personas onto the unhappy, mad street people that they are.Or maybe, just the Director getting the effect he wants, keeping them in character.We figure: probably all of the above, throughout the movie.***I've made up my mind on one thing: the climax and end of this movie do not work as well for me as the rest of the movie does.A denouement is a typical structural element in drama and maybe there's good dramatic reason for that.

Carl wrote:The love scene that this 'earlier scene' preceeded never eventuates in Smithy's House in OHIBT, but , of course, does between Devon and Nikki in the set of Smithy's house. Nice.

then why is piotrek/smithy looking on? actually looking more like smithy there? and he says nothing. he is totally passive. thats not the type of character piotrek krol of the first hour of IE is made out to be. i still believe the scene to be a further blurring of nikki into sue, and the whole world around her as well. too many interesting incongruites to suggest a straight interpetation. and remember, she is fucking billy, not devon. and its funny. in a scary way. it could be a part of OHIBT for all we know, tho usually the people recording the film( on celluloid no less!) are usually shown, but by that point the reality of nikki grace is, i think, ambiguous enough that shes almost between the worlds. not there yet.

Carl wrote:Sue and Doris both hit the skids pretty quickly and end up in he same place.Perhaps Sue's slide is believably as shown but Doris, having caught hubby off base, is more likely to have ended up with his house and assets than she is to be running around Hollywood's seamy streets at night. Perhaps, in the context of OHIBT, both had merely fantasized both Billy's MacMansion and Smithy's tidy little bungalow, and in fact are street people who have an animosity exacerbated by their proximity and mutual insanity.

or maybe ormond/doris become manifestations of the curse, so they arent actually a character at all, but abstraction physically manifest(thats how lynch used to describe BOB from Twin Peaks) even if we see a doris side scene in seemingly OHIBT, the scene is has none of the camera crew etc. shown in the first hour. another indication that its a different reality from nikki's, as is the fact that this is not exactly the sue of the second hour of IE. there is a difference. debate whether they are different characters is kinda pointless. all im going to say is that dern plays a third manifestion or character in the third hour. therefore the doris shown here is also moving through different worlds, seemingly following nikki. is this real? how do you define that by the movie which is asking the same question. i dont believe there is a definitive statement on such things in IE. its abstractness makes us and our perceptions and ideas about the film as much a part of what the film is about as does getting meaning from us(the audience, which is referenced explictly in room 47 during multiple occasions) by our own ability to perceive. we all do it differently. some things are more noticable that others. some us miss the details. some of us look too much. i digress.

Their triangle with Billy might just be a glamorizaion of their dealings with men ( generic). The hypnosis scenes ( of Doris when Sue intrudes and Sue, when she enters the strip club) may be projecting these Personas onto the unhappy, mad street people that they are. Or maybe, just the Director getting the effect he wants, keeping them in character. We figure: probably all of the above, throughout the movie.

yes, absolutely. all the the above and then some.

***I've made up my mind on one thing: the climax and end of this movie do not work as well for me as the rest of the movie does.A denouement is a typical structural element in drama and maybe there's good dramatic reason for that.

i couldnt disagree more. i think it works beautifully, denouement or no(tho i think everything after derns last gun shot(four right?) is the denouement and works as such, the shooting being the climax, and also that it is one of lynch's most positive film endings. how did you come to your decsion about it?

Last edited by JFK on Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

To your last question: just have never been moved emotionally, no catharsis, nothing like that. My wife, btw, disagrees totally with me on this.The endings of FWWM and MD , on the other hand, I do find moving.( Well, not the monkey saying 'Judy', the Red Room and Boxcar scenes is what I mean.)Especially in MD, there is a denouement. It and 'climax' are not the same.**I would not say that he looks on with indifference, the Man In Green Coat. He radiates malign power.***I have to reason through the rest of your post before replying to your other points.

Carl wrote:To your last question: just have never been moved emotionally, no catharsis, nothing like that. My wife, btw, disagrees totally with me on this.The endings of FWWM and MD , on the other hand, I do find moving.( Well, not the monkey saying 'Judy', the Red Room and Boxcar scenes is what I mean.)Especially in MD, there is a denouement. It and 'climax' are not the same.**

but in drama, you need a climax to reach the denouement. the climax begins when dern finds the gun the man in the green suit put there and ends when she shoots the phantom who has taken on a distorted version of her face. i find that there is catharsis, or change, however you want to define denouement. dern stops the phantoms' curse, enters room 47 to a cheering crowd, the cameara zooms in to a light(like beginning credits, and i believe there another shot of light in IE i cant place right now) which could stand for the light from a film projecor, or be symbol or manifestation of the idea of collective consciousness, another theme throughout IE. most importantly are the last two parts, LG and Piotrek/smithy and smithy's son are reunited, as dern looks on from outside the window, in the small place between the curtains, and are overjoyed to be together again, as is smity's son(putting into question his statement that he cant have children)(i mean, sure one could argue about adoption or whatever else, but i find that kind of pointless, as in we are bringing outside perceptions into the film instead of taking it on it own terms). and then finally we have dern back with visitor #1, and when today become tomorrow, she will be different this time, serene and peaceful, not hanging out with her friends and getting the call for OHIBT. to me thats a definite finish to the film, and as non-linear as IE is, it is satisfying to western dramatic structure(i disagree with your statement about " denouement is a typical structural element in drama and maybe there's good dramatic reason for that." i think that depends on the stucture. if one is not using traditional dramatic devices, a traditonal ending wouldnt be congruent). this also brings into question whether the credit sequence is still part of the film. i can see it both ways, in that its context is ambiguous at best(tho to me, at least, the room where this takes place is the back room to nikki grace and piotrek krol's mansion), but it is a joy to watch, so to my interpetation it backs up the very positive ending of IE. i actually found MD more bittersweet than IE. i do agree with your assertation of the end of FWWM though.

Carl wrote:I would not say that he looks on with indifference, the Man In Green Coat. He radiates malign power.***I have to reason through the rest of your post before replying to your other points.

but i thought you were talking abou the blue room/blacklight sex scene which you said took place on the set? lucas is not wearing a green coat when he stands in the doorway(coming from the area where the axxon n. door is, by the way) and looks more like smithy than piotrek krol. that fact, and the confusion between dern and theroux are what make me think this scene is in a differnt world than nikki's, but not yet in sue's. sorry if i wasnt being clear.

Ah, I have blurred two scenes, myself. It's the one where Nikki gets trapped into Sue's persona that I had in mind with the Green Coat.Yes, he did look more like Smithy when he sees them making it on the set. Still, though the Personas are deliberately blended and blurred here, it's Nikki and Devon that are the sex partners. That would make it the actor who is playing Smithy that watches them( could that possibly be Piotrek, himself? I think so.) Unless Smithy is 'seeing', through the silk or maybe just that curtain in the window.Alternate Take: It's Sue and Billy who are having sex, in Smithy's house ( as foretold) and Smithy who is watching. Sue just thinks she is Nikki, confusing Billy who has no idea who Nikki is.I do not favor ths alternative view, but can see the rationale.

id like to amend my previous post about the structure of the film regarding the climax. thinking about what carl said, id have to say that the stabbing and death of dern/nikki/sue would be the climax, extending to the catharsis when dern shoots the phantom the final time as he wears her distorted face and all that comes after. it may be a bit mutilated, but i find the denouement quite fitting.

No, this is the DRAMATIC CLIMAX, true enough, but the DENOUEMENT ( that scene where the main action of the plot is recapitulated and loose ends tied up), it ain't. It raises as many questions as ever it answers, leading me to gig it fairly severely. ( Just my own opinion, of course, as always.)The closest I see to a traditional or even acceptably overt resolution is the sequence that has NIKKI embrace LG in the hotel room and then vanish and LG/Smithy's Son/Smithy reunited. I get it on one level ( the WIT has expiated her guilt; the movie is completed; ' la comedia e finnita') but it does not engage, much less satisfy me either emotionally or intellectually and I doubt ( having seen this flic plenty by now) it ever will.Still, that's only one part of the film. The rest is wonderful! After all, I also find the climax of Hamlet( the other drama to which I periodically return and still find new and interesting facets to appreciate) to be contrived , almost unintentionally funny. It, though, is saved by the 'Goodnight, sweet Prince...the rest is silence', but I really digress here.

Carl wrote: the DENOUEMENT ( that scene where the main action of the plot is recapitulated and loose ends tied up), it ain't.

this presupposes that we agree on the actual plot and the loose ends.which may well be never. i get your point, but i see it differently.it does emotionally engage me. thus, is satisfying as a denouement.nothing more i can say on that point.

I'm sorry if this was mentioned before, but did you notice that Nikki puts on the shades before reading the script, and the next time we see her without them. Why would you put on the shades before reading?

There's a place i'd like to show you. Near the ocean. It's very secluded.I think you'll understand me better if you come with me.

To get into character, I figure, as Sue, who also wears them in the 'all I see from this is blue tomorrows ' scene. Also from that scene: 'I never met anyone like you before.' Cute. DL is a good dialog writer, as the charming monolog shows as well.**'nother fairly recent, 'play within-a-play-within...' movie that showed up finally in the 3-for-$20 bin at our local Blockbuster: Synecdoce, New York( not responsible for spelling words that I can't even pronounce. Sin-EK- doc-uh,really? )While scarcely the gem that Eternal Sunshine... was, it is an interesting film, with good acting throughout.

I failed to note the stage direction that Kingsley reads from the script before the dialog between Devon and Nikki in the rehearsal for Sene 35.' Devon, Billy, arrives at Smithy's house to find Nikki, Sue, looking out the window.' ( A close paraphrase.) And, when she comes fully under the curse and is trapped in the character of Sue, she looks out the window and, while calling Bill-EE!! , can not, of course, communicate with Devon, who is the one who is looking in, separated from the room now by a flapping curtain. A window curtain is used earlier as a 'separating' motif, e.g. it puts in an appearance the second time we see the spinning record then the weird 'brain' image.( This image seems to be a 'reflection' of the spinning, perhaps empty turntable, morphing when the color LG enters the scene into a camera aperture. At any rate, a recording device, another 'separation' motif.)**In a movie where a standard greeting is 'look at me and tell me if you've ever seen me before', a notable reversal of this is in the garden arbor scene , cited in my last Post above: 'I never met anyone like you before...I have the feeling...you have it, too.' Fllowed by one of Dern's iconic 'lost' expressions.

Yes, he did look more like Smithy when he sees them making it on the set. Still, though the Personas are deliberately blended and blurred here, it's Nikki and Devon that are the sex partners. That would make it the actor who is playing Smithy that watches them( could that possibly be Piotrek, himself? I think so.)

KINGSLEY SAYS:

After the characters had been filming for sometime they discovered something INSIDE ... THE 2 LEADS WERE MURDERED ...

... and it was said to be CURSED -- so it turned out to be

NIKI SAYS:

remember I told you...

about that thing, this thing that happened?

It's a story that happened yesterday,

but l know it's tomorrow.

That doesn't make sense.

It was that scene...

that we did yesterday,

.... in that alley,

Sue, damn!

It's a scene we did yesterday.

I'm in the alley...

I see this writing on metal.

And l start rememberin' something... I'm rememberin'...

This whole thing starts floodin' in... this whole memory.

I start to remember...

It's me. Devon, it's me... Nikki...

What is this, Sue?

It's me, Devon, it's me... Nikki...

So what's happening here is DEVON is also the one who's CONFUSED about who she is rather than Niki's being confused about who she is?

So maybe the THING that happens in the STORY is you also get to the point where you get CONFUSED about who is who? To the point where you can no longer tell What is REAL and what is FICTION anymore? And that's also a part of the CURSE? The reason why the story is a CURSED one? Because it also leads to identity confusion?

Or what if that isn't SMITHY but Lucas, and he's also not putting the GUN into the Drawer, but he's taking it OUT of the Drawer? What if he also USES it, and KILLS them (but we just don't see this happening)?

Because right after this, we also JUMP to seeing Dern in the same ALLEY where she carries the same groceries that she's just been talking about. Right?

So in the BLUE SCEEN, she's also talking about something she's already been through before ...

Because after Dern enters into that AXXON N Door from the Alley, then she also runs into still another FEED BACK LOOP again, where she finds herself still sitting at the REHEARSAL Table for SCENE 35 again, where she also finds Devon/Kingsley/Freddy & HERSELF saying the SAME THINGS all over again???

So could the reason for Niki's being TRAPPED inside of SUE'S WORLD also be because NIKI'S also DEAD by this time? Because LUCAS (her husband who looks like Smithy) also KILLS her and DEVON in the BLUE SCENE? So that's also why Devon still thinks he's Billy? Because he's also DEAD and was killed at the time when he's also still acting the part of Billy?

Due to the confusion of the BLUE LIGHTS, perhaps Piotrek or Lucas also didn't realize that Niki was REHEARSING, or just playing her part or her role in that scene, rather than her actually having an affair with her CO STAR???

I have really enjoyed some of the discussions here on this Forum, especially this Thread.The details of IE are wonderful and bewildering. I have no idea when it hit DL that he could structure these really divers elements in such a cohesive manner. Could it have really been in the editing? I doubt it. I think he done this art on purpose.(*heartfelt applause and gratitude.)As of now ( and I think, now on) I agree with those who, some from the beginning, doubted the actual existence of OHIBT. From this side of the bardo, it looks to me like it is a re-make, alright, but of a soul's incarnation, not of a movie.The 'old story', the one with the 'curse', seems to me to be the sequence of lives lead by our motley assortment of souls: Sue/LG/Nikki, Smithy/Piotrek/Mustache,Phantom/Krimp/Mr. K,Rabbit......,...Thank goodness I did not latch on to my GUT earlier ( as some did). I have so enjoyed trying to tease meanng from the movie.Which I still do,for sure, albeit from a different perspective.

I agree with those who, some from the beginning, doubted the actual existence of OHIBT

Instead of going backwards in time, as a way to try to make sense of IE, (and assuming there's a connection among the characters by their being reincarnated), why not try going forwards in time?.

Look at Niki's hair. Look at the way she wears it parted over on the side of her head (in the beginning when she talks to the NEIGHBOR, and then again at the end).

It looks much different from the way the other girl wears her hair in STAGE 32, at the Celebrity Show interview, and in Stage 4 at Rehearsals for Scene 35.

Since Lynch also said in an interview that Dern plays 4 characters in IE, perhaps this is also the 4th Dern?

And instead of making OHiBT, she's actually making another different movie or REMAKE of that Script?

So IE is also a REMAKE of OH, which was a REMAKE of 47, which was based upon the Cursed Gypsy Folk Tale?

And when we watch the Meet & Greet in Stage 32, the Celebrity Show interview, and Rehearsals for Scene 35 in Stage 4, what were watching is also a DOCUMENTARY called KINGSLEY ONE (which is also being made while the REMAKE of the OHiBT Script is being filmed)?

And wouldn't this also help explain who the other Dern is that we see who's saying, "Damn it sounds just like something from our Script," before Kingsley also wants to know what the Bloody Hell's going on?

Because I also see no reason why a review of a past life would also include KINGSLEY's giving Buckey J instructions to lower the equipment down 2 FEET.